Point of Law: If there is a power to decide and decide detrimentally to the prejudice of a person, the duty to act judicially is implicit in exercise of such a power and the rule of natural justice operates in areas not covered by any law validly made. The criteria for an adequate notice is that the Court's conscience must be satisfied that the concerned person had a fair chance to know the details of the case against him and of the action proposed to be taken against him

JUDGMENT :

J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. As the issues raised in all the captioned writ applications are the same, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgement and order.

2. In administrative law rule of natural justice are foundational and fundamental concepts. Law is now well settled that the principles of natural justice are part of legal and judicial proceedings.

[Rattan Lal Sharma vs. Managing Committee, Dr. Hari Ram Higher Secondary School AIR [1993] SC 2155 para 9]

3. We are tempted to preface our judgement with the aforenoted observations of the Supreme Court as in the case on hand the writ applicant has been very badly condemned and that too unheard.

4. The Special Civil Application No.7342 of 2021 is treated as the lead matter.

5. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have prayed for the following reliefs :

“(a) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction of petitioner No.1 as statutory Auditor effected for F.Y. 2020-21 and be pleased to grant consequential relief of reinstatement.

(b) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing respondents to produce on record the letter dated 05.12.2020, in the event respondent No.1 or respondent No.3 has relied on the said letter before taking the illegal action of terminating the assignment given to petitioner No.1 and subsequently provide an opportunity to the petitioners to respond to the same.

(bb) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the letter dated 05.12.2020 issued by respondent No.2 to various PSUs including the present respondents;

(bbb) Pending admission, final hearing and disposal of the petitioner, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the effect, implementation and execution of the letter dated 05.12.2020 issued by respondent No.2 to various PSUs including the present respondents.

(c) Pending admission, final hearing and disposal of the petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the effect, implementation and execution of the termination of petitioner No.1 as statutory Auditors for F.Y. 2020-21 and permit the petitioners to complete the work as agreed for F.Y. 2020-21.

(d) In any view of the matter, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass any such order(s) directing respondent No.1 or respondent No.3 not to consider the letter dated 05.12.2020 (if placed reliance upon) as a ground for blacklisting the petitioners for future agreements;

(e) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant ad-interim ex-parte relief in terms of paragraph 22(c) and (d) hereinabove.

(f) Pass any such order(s) that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

6. The facts giving rise to this writ application may be summarized as under:

7. The writ applicant No.1 is a Chartered Accountant LLP claiming to be working across the verticals of Assurance, Taxation, Accounting, ERP Implementations, Management Consultancy, Cross Boarder Advisory, Investigations, Forensic Audits, Corporate Litigation, Compliance, GRC, M&A’s and allied activities.

8. The writ applicant No.2 is a partner of the Pipara and Company, LLP.

9. The respondent No.1 is an undertaking of the Gujarat Government and is established to undertake construction of residential, non-residential and all other types of building required for the Gujarat Police, Jails, Home Guards amongst other activities.

10. The respondent No.3 herein is the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (hereinafter referred to as “C&AG”) who performs such duties and exercises such powers in relation to the accounts of the Union and the State.

11. The appointments to carry out either the statutory audit or internal audit of a Public Sector U